Archive/File: people/i/irving.david/libel.suit/transcripts/day006.13
Last-Modified: 2000/08/02
Q. But we can, can we not, infer from the page number that
the speech was at that stage a good deal shorter because
in our other version the page number finally winds up as
being 28, I think, does it not? That may be a function of
the different size.
A. Different size typeface.
Q. But I ask you to notice that the top right-hand corner of
the one we have got in the bundle ----
A. Yes.
Q. --- appears to have been changed from a number in its
teens, does it not?
A. Hard to say on the basis of that copy.
Q. In manuscript.
A. I can only say it is hard to say on the basis of that
copy.
Q. It is hard to say, but the first of those digits looks a
bit like a 1, does it not?
A. I can only say it is hard to say.
Q. You see, I do not make these observations in order to lead
to a particular conclusion. All I say is you do not
find
in these different versions and different numberings
of a
page containing the same words, do you, any suggestion
. P-113
that this page was added at a later date, after some
sanitized version had been given to Hitler?
A. That is not the suggestion that I made.
Q. Well, what is it?
A. I am perfectly content with the suggestion and, in
fact,
with the clear proof that Himmler actually used these
words when speaking to this audience of military
gentlemen
who were accustomed to accepting orders from above.
What
I am suggesting is that in the version that he then
sent
to Hitler he retyped that page and replaced it by
another
page that is not before us.
Q. But why do you say that?
A. Because something has happened to this page. Quite
clearly something has happened to this page.
Q. But people make alterations to their drafts all the
time.
Look, do you agree that this smaller typeface probably
represents an earlier generation of the same ----
A. Quite clearly. It is almost certainly the original
shorthand version.
Q. So what leads you to suppose then that the speech was
made
in these terms, let us suppose this is an earlier
draft?
A. Yes.
Q. With the manuscript alteration, that is not Himmler's
writing, an earlier draft, the speech is not made in
those
terms, it is recorded in these terms as they were
recorded, were they not?
. P-114
A. Sometimes they are recorded.
Q. Yes. Then comes a transcript or a version anyway?
A. Yes.
Q. To be put before the Fuhrer?
A. Yes.
Q. And for some reason or another the page which we have
here
and which is in the draft is removed?
A. Yes.
Q. And replaced by something else?
A. Yes.
Q. What is the evidence for that?
A. The fact that this page has clearly been retyped at
some
stage.
Q. So what?
A. And renumbered from there on.
Q. Perhaps it was badly typed in the first place.
A. That is another, third possible alternative, but it is
the
funniest thing, is it not, that this is the one page
that
it happens on. The one page that contains the
pregnant
sentence has clearly been retyped at a different date
by a
different hand on different paper.
Q. Why do you say a different date?
A. Well, because it is on different paper. It is not
taken
from the same wad of paper that the rest of the speech
is
typed on.
Q. But suppose the secretaries do a shift job or
something
. P-115
later in the same day, perhaps the evening, I do not
know
what time of the day the speech is made, nor do we
know
what dates these were drafts were on, do we?
A. No, we do not.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am sorry, Mr Rampton, I hope you do not
mind, can I just see where we have got to? This is a
speech made by Himmler to a whole collection -- how
many
Gauleiters Reichsleiters?
A. This is to top brass in the armed forces.
Q. How many would there have been there?
A. Probably in the order of 100.
Q. And several of them would be seeing Hitler on a fairly
regular basis?
A. Yes.
Q. And your hypothesis is that Himmler is telling the
Generals that he has been ordered to take this drastic
action ----
A. He is speaking ----
Q. --- as against Jews?
A. Once again he is not reading from a prepared script.
Q. No, but he is telling the generals that when it is not
true he is inventing the order -- is this your
hypothesis
-- and that is the reason why he has to sanitize the
version that goes to Hitler?
A. If I can paraphrase the way I have put it in my book,
my
Lord, we have any number of speeches where Himmler
made
. P-116
the same kind of statement. This is the only one
where he
inadvertently, perhaps, talked about a Fuhrer order.
He
may very well have inadvertently, because the General
has
spoken of a Fuhrer order because they are accustomed
to
orders. I do not know what his motive for that was.
Q. It is scarcely inadvertent. It is plainly a speech
that
was carefully prepared in advance.
A. He is not reading from a script, my Lord. We have
probably in this case, certainly in other cases, like
on
one page of paper he would write down 15 or 20 words
on
the basis of which he would speak.
Q. I am bound to say that looking at the bit of paper
Mr Rampton handed in a moment ago, that looks to me
like a
preparatory draft which was altered ----
A. No, my Lord, it is not.
Q. --- for grammatical reasons. Well, you tell me that
and
I will accept it because I expect you have good reason
for
doing so.
A. It very definitely is not, my Lord. This is a typed
version taken from either the shorthand notes or, as
Mr Rampton rightly says, from the sound recording
which is
then edited in handwriting by a third hand. From that
is
then prepared, as we can see by comparison, the large
Fuhrer size typewriter. All I am saying, my Lord, is
one
has to comment on the fact that this page alone has
been
retyped at a different date and inserted, and ----
. P-117
Q. Yes, I follow that.
A. It is significant.
Q. But what I want to ask you is this, Mr Irving, was
Himmler
not taking an almighty risk in pretending to the
Generals
that he had an order when he had not, given that the
Generals were going to be, or some of them, in
communication directly with Hitler?
A. This might be the very reason why he had that page
retyped
making no reference to a Fuhrer order. We do not know
what is on the retyped version. I hesitate to venture
out
too far across that particular thin ice. We cannot
speculate what was on the other version of that page,
the
one that was correctly typed and correctly indented.
Q. I thought you were speculating that it might have been
sanitized to delete the reference to an order.
A. Yes, we cannot safely speculate really any more than
I have done in the book. My Lord, the whole of this
passage is in my book "Hitler's War" with the entire
incriminating quotation, and in a footnote of three
lines,
two and a half lines, I have drawn attention to the
fact
that this page is for some reason or other retyped.
MR RAMPTON: I am not sure you are right about it. It is a
small point, but, to be clear, it is both this and the
next speech of 24th are in Hitler's War 1977?
A. On pages 630 and 631.
Q. Yes. But I think you will find, if you look at page
630
. P-118
of 1991, I think 4th May has disappeared, has it not?
I may be wrong about that.
A. I would be very surprised indeed if they are.
Q. I compared it with 1977. I think ----
A. I would be prepared to bet a substantial sum of money
it
has not vanished.
Q. You find it in Hitler's War 1991 because I could not.
I am not saying it is not there; I could not find it.
A. Well, it will be on page 630. Oddly any, it is
exactly
the same page as the old version.
Q. 630 of the old version. Let us compare the two, shall
we?
MR JUSTICE GRAY: I cannot see it on 630.
A. I may have to withdraw my bet.
MR RAMPTON: It is on 630 of 1977 ----
MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes.
MR RAMPTON: --- sure enough, and 24th May is on page 631.
I am baffled to know where to find it in the edition
for
1991.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: You can always come back to this, Mr
Irving,
because it is difficult to find something when you are
on
the hoof, as it were.
A. I am slightly puzzled because I am just looking at the
end
notes and I see there are two pages of the end notes
have
vanished, three pages of the end notes have vanished
from
your photocopy and I wonder if it is in the end notes
instead.
. P-119
MR RAMPTON: That is not very likely, is it, Mr Irving?
A. I am still on page 830.
Q. If there were an end note about it, it would be in the
same part of the text, would it not?
A. But it would be on page 830 of the end notes which I
do
not have.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think I have.
MR RAMPTON: I have lost mine too.
A. Either that or it has been shovelled to a different
part
of the book which I -- there has been some major
structural change to that chapter I can see with all
the
fresh material we have put in.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: I do not think the note on page 630 ----
A. It does not contain it.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: --- helps.
MR RAMPTON: Your end notes in the 1991 edition are done by
numbers, are they not?
A. By page number.
Q. Yes, I see. My fault. So I have to look to the end
note
to page 630?
MR JUSTICE GRAY: Which is on page 830?
A. I may have put it to a different part of the book, but
it
is not in the same place. We can say that anyway.
MR RAMPTON: There is a real oddity here, Mr Irving. You
have
not got it, so I will read it out.
A. Yes.
. P-120
Q. The end note to page 630 says (and, no doubt, this is
exactly what it says in the 1977 edition), I am
reading at
the end of the note: "His May 5th speech is on
microfilm
and that of May 24th", that is another microfilm
reference?
A. Yes.
Q. It had been in the text in 1977, but there is no
question,
since this is a reference to page 630 of the text,
that it
has left the main stage by the time of the 1991
edition?
A. As you can see, I am as baffled as you are by this.
Q. No, it is quite easy.
A. Yes.
Q. You have edited it out of the text of the 1991
edition,
but have forgotten to change the end note which is
merely
replicating what was said in 1977?
A. Can I amend that statement to say it has been edited
out?
Q. OK.
A. If it has been edited out, of course, many hands edit
it.
The American editors who produce this text may well
have
decided this was just repeating what the next
paragraph
said. I am as baffled as you are and I will look into
it
within the next 24 hours and see what I can make of
it.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: We will come back to it.
MR RAMPTON: I will not push that any further for the
moment
until I hear, if you can produce it, what the
explanation
might be. You see, if we look at the history of the
thing
. P-121
(with which you are well familiar), you told us
yesterday,
I think, that by this time, May 1944, it is likely
that
Hitler was well aware of what Himmler had been doing?
A. Yes.
Q. And you also told us, I think, that if Hitler had been
told or had known earlier in 1942, early 1943, he
probably
would not have minded very much?
A. Yes.
Q. So if you are right, what was Himmler so terrified --
I do
not accept for a moment you are right; I have to say
I think it is a fanciful suggestion -- what on earth
was
Himmler afraid of?
A. Hitler had repeatedly issued injunctions against people
who were issuing Fuhrer orders of which he had no
knowledge. There is several examples of that in the
files. There is one occasion when Albert Speer goes to
see him and Hitler complains to him that the foreign
workers are not getting enough to eat. Speer says: "But
this was a Fuhrer order, mein Fuhrer", and this is
recorded in the minutes of that conference, and Hitler
says: "This is the first I have ever heard of any such
order". So ----

This site is intended for educational purposes to teach about the Holocaust and
to combat hatred.
Any statements or excerpts found on this site are for educational purposes only.

As part of these educational purposes, Nizkor may
include on this website materials, such as excerpts from the writings of racists and antisemites. Far from approving these writings, Nizkor condemns them and
provides them so that its readers can learn the nature and extent of hate and antisemitic discourse. Nizkor urges the readers of these pages to condemn racist
and hate speech in all of its forms and manifestations.